Akiko Suzuki PCS

For what it is worth, I don't find Akiko's PCS being underscored here. After watching her performance, this is what I would have given her for the Components :

SS = 8.5
TR = 7.0
PE = 8.25
CH = 7.75
IN = 7.5

In summary, Akiko had a powerful skate and well executed LP, probably one of her best ever. That being said, there are some clearly discernable weaknesses in this program, namely the lack of connecting steps or elements. She gave this viewer an impression that she just skated from element to element. Most of her jumps were not preceded by any connecting moves of significance, which automatically lowers her GOE relative to other skaters who do more, for example vs. Kaetlyn Osmond. The latter has an ISU Technical Specialist as her coach, who knows exactly what a panel is looking for whereas the design of Akiko's elements aren't very textbook ISU standards. This is such a shame because Akiko has very impressive ability to dazzle people with her footwork, which she only uses during step sequences but not in-between. I think Akiko should give Patrick Chan a call.

When it comes to CH and IN, the construction of the program is adequate but leaves some points on the table. Yes, there were some captivating highlights in the program but for the most part, she seemed laser focus on her elements and forgot about performing. The composition of the CH can also be more clearly separated into different sections, to give her program a clearer sense of layers and change of rythm, which she didn't do. It felt as though the energy level of her performance stayed at the same level throughout.

Finally, Akiko's interpretation of her chosen music can still be improved through better utilization of her in-between and more expressive upper body movements. She simply spent too much time laser focus on her jumps and forgot she needs to express the highlights of her music. It's not because she can't - on the contrary, in the sections where she does such as in her step sequences and towards the end, she was captivating. But after the opening, the gap between that and the ending - there is a lot of empty space. The music is beautiful but she also needs to show it as well.

All things considered, she would have gotten a PCS of 62.4 from me, which is just about in line with the judging panel, so no, I cannot validate the accusations that her PCS is being underscored.

For what it is worth, I don't find Akiko's PCS being underscored here. After watching her performance, this is what I would have given her for the Components :

SS = 8.5
TR = 7.0
PE = 8.25
CH = 7.75
IN = 7.5

In summary, Akiko had a powerful skate and well executed LP, probably one of her best ever. That being said, there are some clearly discernable weaknesses in this program, namely the lack of connecting steps or elements. She gave this viewer an impression that she just skated from element to element. Most of her jumps were not preceded by any connecting moves of significance, which automatically lowers her GOE relative to other skaters who do more, for example vs. Kaetlyn Osmond. The latter has an ISU Technical Specialist as her coach, who knows exactly what a panel is looking for whereas the design of Akiko's elements aren't very textbook ISU standards. This is such a shame because Akiko has very impressive ability to dazzle people with her footwork, which she only uses during step sequences but not in-between. I think Akiko should give Patrick Chan a call.

When it comes to CH and IN, the construction of the program is adequate but leaves some points on the table. Yes, there were some captivating highlights in the program but for the most part, she seemed laser focus on her elements and forgot about performing. The composition of the CH can also be more clearly separated into different sections, to give her program a clearer sense of layers and change of rythm, which she didn't do. It felt as though the energy level of her performance stayed at the same level throughout.

Finally, Akiko's interpretation of her chosen music can still be improved through better utilization of her in-between and more expressive upper body movements. She simply spent too much time laser focus on her jumps and forgot she needs to express the highlights of her music. It's not because she can't - on the contrary, in the sections where she does such as in her step sequences and towards the end, she was captivating. But after the opening, the gap between that and the ending - there is a lot of empty space. The music is beautiful but she also needs to show it as well.

All things considered, she would have gotten a PCS of 62.4 from me, which is just about in line with the judging panel, so no, I cannot validate the accusations that her PCS is being underscored.

I don't think it's the score that bothers most posters, but rather the score in relation to Asada's.

yes, her flip and lutz technique is good, and so are the edge jumps, but she has the Asada-like revolutions type so she could have worse problems of UR jumps, if she grows a lot or she gains weight I think...

Could you please explain more? I don't understand the revolutions and stuff...

Also wouldn't her jumps stay with her if her techniques were really good? The fact that she might lose her jumps means there must be something wrong with her techniques...

Doesn't she also get edge calls for her lutz?

I am still learning the details, so any details information or explanation will be appreciated